On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, DJ Delorie wrote:

Also, I note that some tests check for __SIZE_TYPE__ as I do below,
and others use it unconditionally as a replacement for size_t.  Is
there a convention?

As far as I can tell, __SIZE_TYPE__ is always defined. The tests that check for it probably date from a time when it wasn't?

--
Marc Glisse

Reply via email to